Then what is your plan to support America's gluttunous lifestyle? Nuclear energy, processed corn, solar, wind? I love the people who want to put Wind turbines in the gulf. Would the electricity "Magically" go to the plant from them? Miles and miles of cable would be laid through our wetlands. Ybnormal is correct in the fact that we face a the conundrum of not wanting oil, yet we are dependent on it. We don't want to drill, yet we drive to protest and use everyday items made form petroleum byproducts. There is no short term solution. Your electric car may run on electricity, yet the plant it was made in and the parts it was made form have their basis in the petroleum industry. "Naive" is a word you shouldn't use on someone else. This should be a lesson to us to ramp up our preparations for the future and stop blaming the past. We as a society created this mess and this need for oil, so we need to lay an effective plan down to find better alternative resources that do not harm the environment.
How do the fisherman fish? The oyster harvester harvest? The beach going citizens visit the beach. How are the keyboards and computer parts I am typing on now made? Until a plan is developed and cultivated over a time period (and who knows how long that time period will be), we are "enslaved" to the need for oil (because it is cheap).
BTW, would you pay $10 grand for some solar panels with a $5k dollar repair charge every time the wind blows too swiftly? Even if you could afford it, %90 of the population cannot.

This is in reply to your post dated the above. I am wondering the same thing. The reason people don't have healthcare now is because they can't afford it. So, does passing this bill automatically mean that people will be able to afford it? If a person was not willing to spend $500.00 a month on healthcare previously (and I'm sure you could have found some kind of coverage for that price i.e. catastrophic, wellness visits, prescription, etc. - there aren't 32 million uninsured people with cerebral palsy, cancer, etc. out there that we are trying to cover), how can the government assume the people will be willing to pay $300.00 a month. Because its a better deal and includes more services?
I am not speaking of people who have been dropped, or have debilitating medical conditions. They are the minority of the 32 million. People just think it should be cheap to receive healthcare. I haven't read yet that insurance companies will be required to extend medical insurance to the debilitated/ previously uninsurable at low costs. It only says it cannot deny them, and if they cannot afford the private one, the government will provide them coverage. Where does that lead? Probably to the government providing coverage. Why couldn't we have done that in the first place?
My worry is that when people realize they still have to BUY insurance even though they chose not to before, it may be too late at that point. How is the government going to enforce this? Fines? You think the working poor give a wazoo about fines? When I had no money, the last thing on my mind was having to pay fines, tickets, car insurance, etc. I had nothing for anyone to take. I didn't care about my credit. Its only now that I am a homeowner and have a family that I even pay attention to those things.
So if I don't buy health insurance, what is the next step? A fine? If I refuse to pay that, then what? The new IRS agents will send me to jail? Really? Is this the country everyone wants?

Please someone explain how they intend to "force" others to pay healthcare premiums? Tax credits to those who don't pay taxes? Is that in the form of a check or is it in escrow until someone purchases it through an exchange. Is it in the form of a "fine." How many of the working poor do you know that have "lots" of unpaid parking tickets that help pay for the streets, meter maids, etc. Do you send them to jail? What about prison over crowding and letting murderers walk so pot heads and non-insurance-premium-paying people can sit in jail? It is unconsitutional to "force" you to have to buy anything. Period. Auto insurance, you don't "have" to drive, so you don't have to buy. Homeowner's, flood, you don't "have" to own a home so you don't have to buy. If you own your home unconditionally, you make the decision to insure it or not. You own yourself, you make the decision about healthcare. The bill has passed, okay. I'll give it a shot, I am not screaming doom and gloom. I just think the government has gotten too big and is actually infringing upon our unalienable rights. How are they going to enforce it? This will hit the supreme court one day when someone ends up in jail because they refused to be "forced" to buy health insurance and it will be seen as unconstitutional.
Health market exchanges=good.
no more turning down b/c of pre-existing=good.
limit malpractice suits=good.
Also, show prices for services and detailed bills so we know who's worked on what? You ever been to the hospital and 5 different companies send you a bill? How is that? It should be clearly marked, and we should be able to refuse services. We are adults, we can choose to do that if we want.
I just hope the docs don't become salesman because of the price war that (I will say to avoid being a conspiracy theorist) "might" evolve out of this. We'll see.
In the end, I am still in favor of a smaller government. Just provide me with my life, my liberty, and my right to the PURSUIT of my happiness.

Sorry, I'm middle-class, worked my way up from lower class and have always paid for my insurance. We are fixing to get stuck with the bill. The lower class isn't gonna pay for nothing and now all those middle class families that didn't cover their kids, assuming they were healthy, etc. will have to pay for insurance. No choice anymore. The rich don't and won't have anything to worry about regardless of what the healthcare bill says, so why include them in the argument?
Watch out for the first blue collar working family that doesn't pay insurance and goes to jail and it ends up on the news about how America is treating its people.

Sure, Right, okay. The working poor will get subsidies (what, tax credits? Lower premiums) to purchase insurance. You really think they will spend their tax credit for insurance when they are accustimed to going into an emergency room, waiting 4 hours, getting treated and skipping out on the bill? How is the gov't going to enforce this? Handing out fines? The poor don't worry about fines, don't worry about credit reports, or paying hospital bills to begin with. Then what? Throw them in jail? Take away their kids?
I'm interested to see how highschool grads and working people are going to take to this bill once they realize they no longer have a choice on whether they want to purchase health insurance if it cost too much....Now they have to purchase it no matter the costs.
When I was fresh out of college making 7.00hr for a non-profit, I worked my butt off to keep up with all my financial obligations. I changed jobs and paid my $400.00 COBRA premium out of my 1000.00/mo. wage and made it work. I chose what I wanted. I chose to work the extra time to have cable, cell phones, etc. And I have a pre-existing condition on top of it.
This doesn't guarantee anything. I see it going like this in the lower class' eyes: $695 dollar fine that I won't pay and they can't put me in jail because of overcrowding and the unconsitutionality of it or $1200.00 a year for health insurance I've never paid for before? The answer is probably B.
We can only hope that those costs will be lower. No one can guarantee it. We could have taken smaller steps to reduce costs and gradually worked a plan.

how did the school even know? She could have made a statement by just attending. Instead, the impression is she "notified" the school that she would be attending and this is what she wanted to do. The school thought it could avoid conflict by not entertaining the issue at all, and of course they were wrong. They invited conflict and it has snowballed with the ACLU'S participation.
Someone on here wrote that civil liberties are for all, not just the ones you agree with. That being said, it is correct. But the majority in a democratic society rules, eh? So, because this school gets federal funding, it is a national issue. Yet, the feds cannot intervene because it is in essence a religious issue, being that this town is majority Christian Conservative and that is the way they voted. So the feds should back off or let the schools do what they want. Same for the ACLU. Let students say the pledge of allegiance. Prayers, etc. It's a violation of the few christians in school rights' to not be able to pray in school. You see where I'm going? Noone wins. Noone is happy.

Its great how you like to stir the pot then tell someone to go drink their coffee. You are always looking for an argument. Why does the ACLU have to file a lawsuit to have another law interpreted a certain way on the books so the Gov't and the politicians you vehemently speak of can regulate our interactions another way.
Everything should be a two way street if that is the way they want to play. There should be straight clubs, gay clubs, white clubs, black clubs, i got brown eye clubs, etc. Ridiculous that we have to stereotype everything.
This girl should have just shown up and it more than likely wouldn't have been nearly as big an issue.

I would just put in big words: "WHO DAT?" as the title and start the story off with:

NoOne. The answer to the question bellowed by an entire Gulf Coast region and a world-wide Who Dat nation of fans at ______ (the time the scoreboard hits zero) as the dream is realized, the faith rewarded, and the hard work repaid. The New Orleans Saints are SuperBowl 44 Champions. The French Quarter is alive, the electricity is buzzing, and New Orleans is way above sea level in the clouds tonight...Congratulations New Orleans!

You know, something to that effect. I'm sure one of the better writers can put into words the joy that this city will feel and the surge of adrenaline that will be realized come Sunday night. The Saints represent what a focused and determined group can do to resurrect themselves from the brink of collapse and by leaning on each other and working in unison to one goal, they can achieve anything they want. Even when doubters failed to recognize that the city was back, the team was good, New Orleanians always knew we'd get there one day. Felt it in their bones that our city and our team deserves to be here. We are stepchildren no more. Everyone knows that our bloodlines extend everywhere and that we as a team and a city finally deserve some respect. WHO DAT?!

You sure spend alot of times on these forums. I've seen a bunch of posts deposited on this forum in the last 30 minutes. You and areyou.... are at odds. He says the pastor legally owns it, you say he SHOULD return it because he was wrong for taking it in the first place and it only promotes the looting of peoples' housing after a disaster, etc., and why is he making an icon out of the helmet, someone else chimes in that Southern religions are cannabalistic, etc. That's all diffrentviews, which is fine, but those views don't have to be pressed onto another person nor should that person be loathed because they think different or act different. My view is different from yours, you think you are doing right and your judgement is morally sound, but really, the whole arguement is insignificant because it doesn't affect the big picture - LIFE. What he is doing doesn't affect yours, so on, so on, so why worry about it? Point being, you gave me the impression: "I like had to comment on this because what this "guy" did was so wrong, I mean, he shoudln't have saved it, just let it go to the dump. How wrong of him. He took their carpet out? He should have asked the homeowners if they wanted to keep it....HOW DARE HE!" you know, a little overzealous in your commenting about something that shouldn't really bother anybody. That's my view, probably different from yours (of which I am entitled to do as well). Can I say BLESS YOU or will that ruffle your feathers as well? :)

rhythmnola - Why are u such a negativist? Are you the world police? Not everybody HAS to do things the way YOU see fit. So what if this Southern Baptist Minister uses the helmet in his sermons. Why should that ruffle your feathers? I mean really? Are you just an unhappy person? Huh? Jeez.......

I know. I wish he would take a wrong turn down iberville past midnight and ask everybody there that question. Nobody here is poor, just a diffrent mentality as to how we are blessed.....and rooting for Alabama, ha! Just ignore the lame dude. He ain't worth it.

me bad roro. This article posted at 12:08 WITHOUT the playoff schedule which was added bit by bit until later. But, I was just jiving with the NFL schedule makers and naysayers and letting everybody know we really didn't lose anything going in to the playoffs. Calm down, didn't mean to twist your shorts. To everybody else, WHO DAT!!!!

The NFL just couldn't bring themselves to give us a night game. That is the only thing the last 3 games cost us. It's all good. How many of y'all can get ready for that game? That's plenty of time to pregame and bring the noise, WHO DAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What beliefs of yours have you assume everybody is incapable of taking care of themselves? Or, for that matter, that everyone who drinks will get drunk, drive, and endanger everyone? There are such things as designated drivers, cabs, social drinkers, and people who go there with friends and don't play. Also, not everyone will play the games to "get drunk!" You sound like someone saying, "I can't get other people to think like me, so I am for a Government who can force people to turn to my view." That is oppression. Let people be responsible for themselves. Don't label them drunk before they play the game. Government does not deserve a say in every decision we make. Otherwise, I claim no responsibility for my actions a.k.a. "Well, the government said I could or didn't say I couldn't."

Also, read the article. It doesn't say anything about protecting people from over consumption or themselves. It says it will fine bars for games that promote a certain number of drinks in a certain time period. Some people play beer pong with shots of beer (normally equalling one full drink), some games last a long time because people are lousy shots. How is the government going to define the variables that go along with what they are trying to regulate? Are they going to stand there with stopwatches and measuring cups?

Lastly, you are not entitled to pass judgment on anyone who puts a drink in their hand or who wants to do anything you don't agree with and label them a danger to your pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness and automatically take away theirs. Remember, in this country (for now anyway), all person are presumed innocent until proven guilty.